Tax Amnesty Uptake in Light of Behavioral Intervention: A Natural Field Experiment

This is a messaging study that includes behavioural intervention sentences in emails. The emails are sent out by the administration and are similar in content except for the sentence that implies social norm, deterrence or benefit depending on the group a subject is assigned.
Since the subjects receive communication through email, the behavioural intervention in the email content is reflected in the subject line. In the email body, the subject is addressed by name and informed about the amnesty, the period within which it runs, and the arrears accrued by them. The next sentence is the treatment, made salient by bolding. The email concludes with links to the amnesty guidelines and contact details. Apart from the treatment variation depending on random assignment, message content is the same for all the subjects.

2023-12-11

2024-06-30

Amnesty uptake, Arrears payment,

The study will use regression analysis to estimate average treatment effects in the first phase of the experiment. Here we measure how behavioural intervention affects amnesty uptake and subsequent payment.
In the second phase, we measure dynamic treatment effects arising from a treatment assignment path and so estimate a logistic autoregressive model. Here, we evaluate the optimal sequence in amnesty uptake and settlement of arrears.

Data correction

The study evaluates the behavioural intervention that leads to amnesty uptake and subsequent settlement by subjects in arrears through a natural field experiment. It also examines treatment sequencing and its role in influencing compliance with the amnesty. Through randomised controlled trials, 34,886 delinquents are randomly assigned to four arms. In the first phase, they receive benefit-oriented messages, deterrence messages, and dynamic social norms. The control group only receives information about the amnesty. Those in the social norm and benefit treatment arms that do not take up the amnesty by the second round, receive sequenced messages in the second third and fourth round of reminders. The sequence continues for non-takers in the social norm and benefit group until they receive each of the three treatment messages. Following from literature, the deterrence treatment is the strongest signal, we therefore do not apply sequencing of treatment to subjects in this arm. Instead, subjects in this arm are treated with reminders. Outcomes of interest are amnesty uptake and subsequent payments. We extend behavioural intervention literature by focusing on delinquents in an amnesty when policy is silent on heightened enforcement measures post amnesty. In addition, we introduce sequencing in a within subject design and evaluate its effectiveness in enhancing compliance behaviour.

Not available

In office by computer

Individual

No

Four groups to include tree treatments and one control from one of six administrative regions.

34,886 individuals

Control 9275
Benefit 8537
Deterrence 8537
Social Norm 8537

Minimum detectable effect ≈ 3%, power ≈ 80% sample size 34,886 individuals/firms standard deviation ≈ 6.67